What is time?

[Influx]

I see, we are on two totally different frequencies. You talking about what the PHYSICAL clock does. I am talking about what is represents. The clock, represents a concept that synchronizes our life. How it accomplishes that, pendulum digital or along, does not change the fact that the concept of time is not an observable physical natural phenomena. The function of the clock is metaphorical. IT could be argued that the clock measures the position of our planet as it rotates around its axis. It took me five years to realize this, I know how difficult it can be to shake off the standard models grip on our minds. NOT one single clock in existence has a time sensor as part of it operation. So what is the clock then. Have you though about that at all.

What is the clock? IT DISPLAYS THE "TIME"

How does it know what time it is? Is it measuring on effect of time, the time flow, frame dragging or what ever? NO! So how does it know what time is it? The clock displays what we tell it to display! IT is a synchronization tool, a symbol, a metaphor for our invented concept, the IDEA of time.

[kevin]

What if TIME is alive?
THEY, whoever they are keep altering time, and frequencies?
THEY moved christmas day 11 days out of January.
I was strangely drawn to this clock in St Omer France, it is an astrological clock in a very very gothic cathedral, what this link doesn't tell you is that there is a labyrinth centre of the cathedral in line with the clock, and the TIME I was drawn to there was very odd, I ended up jumping over the ropes with acess interdit written on them, and following both sides of the labyrinth into the centre, as I finally reached the centre the clock struck and the organ kicked in, it was quite a shock for some preists to find me stood there, experiencing a very strange TIME.
I snapped out of a sort of trance to hear them saying "Le sorcier"
They were rather perturbed as I pointed my rods at each of them in turn and followed them as they walked around the labyrinth, they retreated, confused.
I took a picture of the clock, it has a huge white flow going down towards the labyrinth, I think that is a flow of time.
http://www.theotherside.co.uk/tm-herita ... hedral.htm
Kevin

[altonhare]

You talking about what the PHYSICAL clock does. I am talking about what is represents.

Does not the readout on a clock represent the distance-traveled by a pendulum or an electron in a circuit the same way the readout of a volt-meter represents the velocity of electrons in a circuit?

[lizzie]

Kevin said: What if TIME is alive? THEY, whoever they are keep altering time, and frequencies? THEY moved Christmas day 11 days out of January.

Wow! I agree with you; time is really about frequencies. The Roman Catholic Church has been fudging time since "time immemorial."

"By the 16th century, the effect of the imprecision of the Julian calendar was becoming significant enough that it prompted the Catholic Gregorian (Pope Gregory XIII) calendar reform of 1582, in which Thursday, October 4th, was followed by Friday, October 15th."

Everything in our “reality” is inverted. So it comes as no surprise to me to learn that these priests and monks have known all along about the secrets of the aether. They stole the knowledge from the Templars and then massacred the Cathars (the earliest genocide in Europe) so they would have no other competiton in the "religious realm" when it came to this secret knowledge. Of course, they didn't mind sharing the information about the aether with the secular secret societies -- freemasons, rosicurians, Theophists, etc. (That way they could all collude together to keep the secrets of the aether hidden from the "common folk".)

Kevin said: I was strangely drawn to this clock in St Omer France, it is an astrological clock in a very very gothic cathedral, what this link doesn't tell you is that there is a labyrinth centre of the cathedral in line with the clock.

The astrological clock would allow them to determine the proper planetary conjunctions. Planetary alignments determine the strength of the aether flow. I read somewhere that they use magic squares to create labyrinths which recreate the geometrical shapes of planetary alignments. I bet the labyrinth structures are also good for capturing the aether flow.

I feel the Church is an “energy zombie.” The sacred geometry in all the churches is designed to capture the aether flow for the benefit of the priests and not for their parishioners. They probably suck up all the chi energy from their parishoners and use it for themselves. After all I would imagine that it would be a "downer" for parishoners to have to listen to lectures on hellfire, sin and damnation when they, too, could be "sucking up" the aether.

Kevin said: I ended up jumping over the ropes with acess interdit written on them, and following both sides of the labyrinth into the centre, as I finally reached the centre the clock struck and the organ kicked in, it was quite a shock for some preists to find me stood there, experiencing a very strange TIME.
I snapped out of a sort of trance to hear them saying "Le sorcier.” They were rather perturbed as I pointed my rods at each of them in turn and followed them as they walked around the labyrinth; they retreated, confused..

LOL. I bet they never expected to see any of their "parishoners" down there with them enjoying "aether heaven" ... especially someone with rods (a diviner). No wonder they thought you were a sorcerer. Of course you are a sorcerer, but a good sorcerer. Did you hold the rods across your chest and say to them, “Get thee away from me…” (LOL. Moses with his rods in the labyrinth...)

Kevin said: I took a picture of the clock, it has a huge white flow going down towards the labyrinth, I think that is a flow of time.

The labyrinth is designed to capture the flow of the aether. The Aether is from 4D and 4D is the realm of frequencies; so you did see the flow of time (the aether).

http://jeofurry.wordpress.com/2008/05/2 ... ds-feasts/

http://biblelight.net/Madrid-Sabbath.htm

[Influx]

Does not the readout on a clock represent the distance-traveled by a pendulum or an electron in a circuit the same way the readout of a volt-meter represents the velocity of electrons in a circuit?

The distance traveled by the clock hands and the pendulum has nothing to do with what the concept of time means to US. When I have a need to be somewhere at three, for example, the distance covered by a large clock will be more than the small clock, but both still will display three o'clock. Again, the clock is a metaphorical, that is, a symbol, representation of a concept. While the voltmeter measures an observable physical evidence of natural phenomena! I can not explain myself any other way, so I guess this conversation is a dead end.

[altonhare]

The distance traveled by the clock hands and the pendulum has nothing to do with what the concept of time means to US.

As far as I'm concerned, in my daily life, "time" is precisely this, or some similar variant.

What does time mean to you? Perhaps defining the word "time" will make yourself clear.

When I have a need to be somewhere at three, for example, the distance covered by a large clock will be more than the small clock, but both still will display three o'clock.

Of course I'm talking about the ratio of distance-traveled by the hand from A to B to the distance-traveled by the hand from A to A. I did not make that clear before, now I do. So this point is moot. Perhaps you should define "time" to make your argument clear.

[Influx]

As far as I'm concerned, in my daily life, "time" is precisely this, or some similar variant.

Of course the concept of time is useful in our daily life. I am not arguing that this "time" i.e. the synchronization system, does not exist.

What does time mean to you? Perhaps defining the word "time" will make yourself clear.

The universe could care less about time and our limited systems of measuring the universe. That is, if it could care! We are, as humans, who die and are imperfect, are simple projecting our fears and shortcomings onto the cosmos and expect it to behave as such. Time is nothing more than an invention of the human condition and suffering. The universe has only movement of the celestial objects, a movement IN THE volume of space that can only be seen in relation to the celestial bodies that occupy that volume. There is NO inherent value or condition that can be linked to time in the structure of space. The illusion of time arises only in our minds due to the cyclical nature of objects that move in the volume of space relative to themselves.

Of course I am talking about Einsteinium time.

[altonhare]

Of course I am talking about Einsteinium time.

Oh well in this case you should have simply stated as much. Nobody around here takes relativity seriously.

A clock has nothing to do with Einsteinian time, though.

[Influx]

A clock has nothing to do with Einsteinian time, though.

Hmm, I thought you were arguing that the clock was indeed measuring some form of time? Are you? I am merely stating that the clock is a representation of the concept of time! I was arguing against Einsteins time. Time travel, frame dragging, time paradoxes, time warps, time flow/s, these, I say are impossible and do not exist! If you agree with me on this, then we must have been arguing on the nature of the synchronization system, which is kind of useless, since it is on arbitrary concept.

[altonhare]

A clock has nothing to do with Einsteinian time, though.

Hmm, I thought you were arguing that the clock was indeed measuring some form of time? Are you? I am merely stating that the clock is a representation of the concept of time! I was arguing against Einsteins time. Time travel, frame dragging, time paradoxes, time warps, time flow/s, these, I say are impossible and do not exist! If you agree with me on this, then we must have been arguing on the nature of the synchronization system, which is kind of useless, since it is on arbitrary concept.

I'm saying that the clock measures distance-traveled by the hand/pendulum, which is dynamic (the hand is there *after* it is there, and before it is there... etc.). The distance-traveled by a hand or a pendulum from some reference point to where it is now is termed the "time". This is the only quantitative definition of time that is rational. It measures something that exists, i.e. is plainly before you, it measures the distance-traveled by an object. The clock is not a symbolic representation, it is a direct measuring device.

Whether it is perfectly reliable or not has nothing to do with the question "is it measuring something that exists". It plainly is. It's right there. As far as "reliability" is concerned, we must always make an assumption with respect to quantifying time. We must always take a reference standard (like the swinging of a pendulum) that we assume is immutable and unchanging. If we use our pendulum here then send someone 1000 miles south to use the same pendulum, and get different results, we conclude that our reference standard must remain at the exact same location to be dependable. We can go on testing it in various ways to insure our reference standard is as reliable as possible.

You may argue that, because we must *assume* a reference standard, that this whole thing is an artificial construct. Since we can never know with certainty that our reference standard really is perfect as we assume it is, this is ultimately arbitrary, we can always be wrong. While it is valid to note these shortcomings, it does not render the quantitative concept of time an arbitrary or impossible concept. While we may be wrong, we could just as well be absolutely right! If our reference standard is immutable, our quantification of time is perfect, and there is no reason to believe there is not such a reference standard. These days we assume the rate of transmission of light is constant i.e. immutable. Perhaps it is the "last reference standard". Perhaps not.

I agree that frame dragging, time travel, time flows, etc. are irrational and supernatural. They are the product of mistaking time and space for objects rather than concepts. This is why I harp on definitions so hard. Einstein's mistakenly treating concepts for objects is what has led to such irrationality in modern science! If you reread my quantitative definition of time a little ways back, this is the only quantitative definition I've come across that is rational and scientific. You will see the explicit connection of that definition to my discussion of the clock. The other definition of time, non quantitative, is simply causality. Before/after, cause/effect. This is really just a re-expression of the law/axiom of Identity.

[lizzie]

altonhare said: I agree that frame dragging, time travel, time flows, etc. are irrational and supernatural.

I understand some numbers are also irrational, too. Pity. Phi for instance is irrational; and it certainly has its "supernatural" aspects. Without Phi, there would be no rational (or irrational) human beings existing in this dimension.

Irrational Numbers
http://www.mathsisfun.com/irrational-numbers.html

An Irrational Number is a number that cannot be written as a simple fraction - the decimal goes on forever without repeating. There is no pattern to the decimals, and you cannot write down a simple fraction that equals Pi. Values like 22/7 = 3.1428571428571... get close but are not right.

(Shame on Mother Nature; she just couldn't get it RIGHT! Do you think if we had had a Father Nature that we would have had only Rational Numbers? Just an "irrational" thought.)

Rational Numbers
http://regentsprep.org/Regents/math/rational/Lrat.htm

A rational number is a number that can be expressed as a fraction or ratio (rational). The numerator and the denominator of the fraction are both integers. When the fraction is divided out, it becomes a terminating or repeating decimal.

[junglelord]

As far as I know a standard of time measurement is based on the Sun, Moon, Earth and Spin.
So a "clock" in what ever form, sundial, monolith, atomic clock, its all based on three spin ratios.
The Sun, The Earth, The Moon. I believe they call that frame of reference.

Now if you re-organize the standard of measurement and start with the Quantum Level, then a Quantum of Time is determinable and is useable....I call that Quantum Resonaces. It is based on the Compton Wavelength, Planck Length, Coloumbs Charge Constant, Quantum Spin Numbers, c. This is the smallest quantum moment. This is the building block of the so called Material World.

Therefore there are and always will be Two Frequency Domains at any one time.

[Grey Cloud]

Great post Junglelord,

This is the smallest quantum moment. This is the building block of the so called Material World.

Each one is thought becoming manifest.

Therefore there are and always will be Two Frequency Domains at any one time.

I would suggest that there is only one. The difference is in our perception. Our perception is limited by our physical body. In other words, we view the physical world in slow motion. The Universe operates at the speed of thought. 'To infinity and beyond...'

[altonhare]

As far as I know a standard of time measurement is based on the Sun, Moon, Earth and Spin.
So a "clock" in what ever form, sundial, monolith, atomic clock, its all based on three spin ratios.
The Sun, The Earth, The Moon. I believe they call that frame of reference.

I believe you are mistaken:

The second (abbreviation, s or sec) is the Standard International ( SI ) unit of time. One second is the time that elapses during 9,192,631,770 (9.192631770 x 10 9 ) cycles of the radiation produced by the transition between two levels of the cesium 133 atom.

There are other expressions for the second. It is the time required for an electromagnetic field to propagate 299,792,458 meters (2.99792458 x 10 8 m) through a vacuum.

http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition ... 77,00.html

The second definition is primarily what I refer to.

[Influx]

Altonhare said. I'm saying that the clock measures distance-traveled by the hand/pendulum, which is dynamic (the hand is there *after* it is there, and before it is there... etc.).

That seems totally irrelevant to my puny mind, I mean, the distance traveled by the clocks hand in, say, one hour, has nothing do with the fact that I have traveled sixty miles, as in 60 mph! As a digital readout of my clock covers absolutely no distance in the 60 miles that I drove! The sixty miles that I drove in one hour has nothing to do with how much distance was covered by the analog clocks read out. But has everything to do with how many predefined and agreed upon intervals of the clocks have passed during my trip of sixty miles!

Altonhare said. It measures something that exists, i.e. is plainly before you, it measures the distance-traveled by an object. The clock is not a symbolic representation, it is a direct measuring device.

The clock measures something? The clock is a synchronization system, everything is measured against the clock, What does the clock measure? You said "it measures the distance-traveled by an object" . I thought the odometer did that. The distance traveled (as by a vehicle) has noting to do with time. The speedometer tells you the speed in mph, which are counted intervals of the clock. The clock is a monostable vibrator, ideally, one in which the vibrations do not wary from pulse to pulse and are all in sync to a central reference point. The atomic clock, or whatever...! The clocks readout, whatever shape or form it takes, is a representation of that monostable vibration. The readout is then used for everyday life or scientific activities as a reference point ! This is the whole concept of time! The clock is a interface to that concept. That is, the clock, whatever shape or form it takes, is a representation of that concept and at the same time an interface!

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/time

http://tf.nist.gov/cesium/fountain.htm